Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #149
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Friday, August 2 1996        Volume 01 : Number 149

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 00:02:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 249 (/dev/joe)

> Call For Judgement 249
>   Subject: Interpreting R 514
> Initiator: Malenkai
>     Judge: /dev/joe (selected Aug 01, 1996, 00:51h New York Time)

As with all win attempts, this is the almost mandatory CFJ to stop it.
In all fairness, I refuse this appointment as allowed by Rule 588.
Somebody would just appeal it anyway.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 01:07:47 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Misc: What Phoebe Says

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> She spoke:
> "Be careful, when you allow players to agree to require actions to
> occur, to ensure that the players can't force other players to do
> things without their consent.  The File Clerk is your friend." 

/dev/joe CLAIMS that Phoebe said the above.  I believe this "message is 
obviously fake and not clever or witty enough for the nanotech Phoebe",
and in accordance with R 730, I am challenging its authenticity.

"Phoebe would not say anything so crass"

There will be a 3 day voting period. Send your votes to [email-masked]
(assistant tabulator).  Please put "phoebe" in the subject line.
The legal votes are specified by R 730 (below, in part):

I note the following claims that the votes should be sent to the Tabulator,
but R 414 claims precedence, so they should go to the AT.  Missed this one.

Malekai/AT

> If any other player believes that this message is obviously fake and
> not clever or witty enough for the nanotech Phoebe, they may challenge
> the authenticity of the message by posting to that effect publically.
> There will then be a 3 day voting period, during which players may send
> one vote each to the tabulator saying either "Phoebe would not say
> anything so crass", or "Phoebe said much the same thing to me once".
> No quorum is required, a simple majority of votes challenging the
> message's validity will prove that the player did not accurately report
> what Phoebe said, and they will lose the 6 points awarded previously, and
> will be fined another 6 points for selfishly keeping Phoebe's wisdom
> to eirself.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 01:10:55 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 249 (/dev/joe)

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> > Call For Judgement 249
> >   Subject: Interpreting R 514
> > Initiator: Malenkai
> >     Judge: /dev/joe (selected Aug 01, 1996, 00:51h New York Time)
> 
> As with all win attempts, this is the almost mandatory CFJ to stop it.
> In all fairness, I refuse this appointment as allowed by Rule 588.
> Somebody would just appeal it anyway.

"almost mandatory"? There hasn't been a single win attempt in this game
that hasn't been involved in CFJ.  Just being efficient.

Clerk of the Courts

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 01:16:50 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 249 (tinan)

/dev/joe has declined, and tinan been chosen for the following, and has 3
days to respond.  It seems that the die is judging it :)

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 249
  Subject: Interpreting R 514
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: /dev/joe (selected Aug 01, 1996, 00:51h New York Time)
2nd Judge: this is not a name (selected Aug 01, 1996, 01:17h New York Time)

Statement:

The term "Player", as used in R 514 section (ii), refers to a Player who
is a party to a Contract, as used in R 514 section (i), and thus the
behaviours regulated by a Contract are not enforceable upon any player
who is not party to the Contract, regardless of what the Contract
says.
 
Malenkai's reasoning:

I hope that's a single statement.  I'll let the judge worry about the
reasoning.  I can't stop laughing.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 00:21:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Even *MY* mailer is broken!

Argh!  Even the postmaster's mail-sending program is broken!

For some reason, the messages I sent out between 23:00 CDT July 31 and
00:00 CDT August 1 bear an incorrect time zone designation.  These
messages are dated:  Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:xx:xx +1900 (CDT)
The time zone should be -0500.  These represent the same position on
the earth, but one day different.  I don't know why it did this, but
it didn't do it with messages sent earlier yesterday, or on messages sent
today.  I will try to figure out who maintains the program, and report
the bug.  In case anyone is interested, the bug happened with elm 2.4 PL25.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:22:24 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 249 (tinan)

At 1:16 AM 8/1/96, Malenkai wrote:
>/dev/joe has declined, and tinan been chosen for the following, and has 3
>days to respond.  It seems that the die is judging it :)

I note from my little Gaol cell (hey you can't require a p[layer in Gaol to
preform ANY action :)) that it appears as if tinan and/or /dev/joe are
illegaly manipulating the die to return a verdict in their favor.  Or
possibly, they have illegally manipulated that poor steel flea so that she
would manipulate the die.

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 01:34:02 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Offical: CotC

As of 2:02 EDT, Aug 01, the pool of eligible Judges will be indetermine,
until the voting results of P 1043 are returned. Hence the quick,
inevitable CFJ of the Contract.  I was tempted to go on vacation until
P 1043 came back, duh.  Please keep that in mind, and hopefully 1043 will
come back quickly.

Clerk of the Courts

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 01:45:16 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: Fleeing

I am running to the Church of the Markovian Dream.

(See rule 1014.)

- --      Mike Epstein            
      [email-masked]          Condense soup, not books!
  *                      *      
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/   

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 01:47:44 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: Made it on time!

I am holding the Altar by the Horns.

(See rule 1014.)

- --      Mike Epstein            "Time is an illusion,
      [email-masked]           lunchtime doubly so."
  *                      *           --Douglas Adams
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/   

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 01:57:40 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 249 (ThinMan)

tinan has declined, and ThinMan been chosen for the following, and has 3
days to respond.  I'll swear that I was going to say on the last one
that if tinan declines, ThinMan will get it :)

Other notes: There is no CotC 238, CotC error.

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 249
  Subject: Interpreting R 514
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: /dev/joe (selected Aug 01, 1996, 00:51h New York Time)
2nd Judge: this is not a name (selected Aug 01, 1996, 01:17h New York Time)
3rd Judge: ThinMan (selected Aug 01, 1996, 01:59h New York Time)

Statement:

The term "Player", as used in R 514 section (ii), refers to a Player who
is a party to a Contract, as used in R 514 section (i), and thus the
behaviours regulated by a Contract are not enforceable upon any player
who is not party to the Contract, regardless of what the Contract
says.
 
Malenkai's reasoning:

I hope that's a single statement.  I'll let the judge worry about the
reasoning.  I can't stop laughing.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 02:03:01 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 249 (ThinMan)

Malenkai wrote:
> 
> Other notes: There is no CotC 238, CotC error.

There sure isn't.  See what happens when you rush to meet deadlines.
I need to go to Gaol, so I can go to on vacation. Where is that AOJ? :)

It should say there is no CFJ 238.

Malenkai

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:04:28 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Church Stuff 

As founder of the church of the Markovian Dream, I am expelling this is not
a name from the Church.  He is more than welcome to return to the church
after he has been fried to a crisp!.

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 02:11:41 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Church Stuff

snowgod wrote:
>As founder of the church of the Markovian Dream, I am expelling this is not
>a name from the Church.  He is more than welcome to return to the church
>after he has been fried to a crisp!.

Sorry, it's too late. I already posted the messages.

In addition, I see no rule allowing you (or anyone else) to expel me. And 
Church membership is Protected by 775.

- --      Mike Epstein            "Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist
      [email-masked]           ought to have his head examined."
  *                      *                        --Samuel Goldwyn
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/   

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 02:10:10 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Church Stuff

Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> As founder of the church of the Markovian Dream, I am expelling this is not
> a name from the Church.  He is more than welcome to return to the church
> after he has been fried to a crisp!.
> 

As much as I like the intent, I claim that action is not possible for
someone in Gaol.

Malenkai

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 02:13:09 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Invoking R 563

In accordance with R 563, as a Bronze Torch owner, I wish to add
some reasoning to CFJ 249.  Furthermore, I choose to make that
reasoning public. The reasoning, shall read, in full:

BURN THE WITCH !!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:17:04 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Oops-E-Daisy 

I note that my recent action (removing tinan from the church) was an
illegal action and cannot have been performed.  The church rule is lower on
the precedence pole than the Gaol (I thought it was the other way around)
and therefore I was never able to kick tinan out of church.

Tinan is still a member of the church, and has indeed taken the alter by
the horns.

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:21:08 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: Church Stuff

At 2:11 AM 8/1/96, this is not a name wrote:
>snowgod wrote:
>>As founder of the church of the Markovian Dream, I am expelling this is not
>>a name from the Church.  He is more than welcome to return to the church
>>after he has been fried to a crisp!.
>
>Sorry, it's too late. I already posted the messages.
>
>In addition, I see no rule allowing you (or anyone else) to expel me. And
>Church membership is Protected by 775.

I cannot, you are correct, but for the wrong reasons.  Church policy allows
me to remove you.  Also R1014 says that if a player is removed from the
church for whatever reason he is burned anyway.  However, I forgot for a
moment that I was in Gaol and unable to preform that action.

Anyhow,  what fun would a drunken church meeting be without tinan???

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 2:23:57 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1064

Proposal 1064 - Thu Aug 01 02:23:57 EDT 1996
457 On Ice Fix
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 457 to add the following after the second paragraph:

 {{     Any player who is on vacation who does not have an
expected duration recorded will have recorded for them an expected
duration of 30 days from the time the proposal which created this
rule change was adopted. This  paragraph has precedence over the
previous one.}}

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 02:29:26 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Church Stuff

snowgod wrote:
>I cannot, you are correct, but for the wrong reasons.  Church policy allows
>me to remove you.  Also R1014 says that if a player is removed from the
>church for whatever reason he is burned anyway.  However, I forgot for a
>moment that I was in Gaol and unable to preform that action.

Actually, church policy says nothing about removing members. And even if 
it did, it couldn't take precedence over the rules.

- --      Mike Epstein            "Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And
      [email-masked]           suppose you were a member of Congress.
  *                      *       But I repeat myself."
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/                              --Mark Twain

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 02:17:30 -0500
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Am I on Vacation? 

I think the subject of the message says it all. I declared myself off
vacation a couple of weeks ago, and even had a Silly Vacation Hat designed
for me. Then I am told that due to problems with Rule 457, I am not really
off vacation. I have asked for an explanation, and I haven't received one.
Would someone please explain to me what is going on, and whether or not I am
on vacation? Thanks,

Robert Sevin who may or may not be...
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 07:51:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 244 Verdict

On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Malenkai wrote:

[big snip]

> If I do not return a definitive verdict, it simply
> becomes someone else's, or the Supreme Court's whim.

[and more snipping]

I object to the Supreme Court being singled out for the use of whim.  I'm
sure all Judges, including the Justices, return decisions in accord with
R215, to the best of their knowledge and abilities.  The idea that the
Supreme Court uses whim is a result of that court admitting that their
knowledge and abilities are not infallible, a condition that should be
obvious, and is not, I expect, limited to the Supreme Court.

- -mr cwm (Justice)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:46:59 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: Am I on Vacation? 

Robert Sevin wrote:
>I think the subject of the message says it all. I declared myself off
>vacation a couple of weeks ago, and even had a Silly Vacation Hat designed
>for me. Then I am told that due to problems with Rule 457, I am not really
>off vacation. I have asked for an explanation, and I haven't received one.
>Would someone please explain to me what is going on, and whether or not I am
>on vacation? Thanks,

The problem with R457 is that it states that "The only thing a player on
vacation may legally do is take himself off vacation."  R111 (immutable)
states that "A player always has the option to leave the game."  This
constitutes a mutable/immutable conflict, so by R108, R457 is entirely
void.  I am not sure at the moment how long that rule has been void, but
supposedly it was valid at the time that you went on vacation.  The fact
that R457 is void means that your vacation status has absolutely no effect
on you (you may vote, be selected to judge, etc.), except for anything that
specifically depends on vacation status, like your very fashionable SVH.

ThinMan

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 11:44:18 -0500
From: Suzy Aziewicz <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: vacation 

I, Simon Marty Harriman hereby return from vacation.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 11:46:01 -0500
From: Suzy Aziewicz <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: help! 

HELP!

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:13:57 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Registrarness, etc.

A new observer joined the game:
  Klaus Amann  --  [email-masked]

Simon Marty Harriman tried to return from vacation.  If P1043 passed, then
it actually worked.

[email-masked] asked to change the name of the Permanent Vacation
party back to FOOZBALL.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:21:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 247 (mr cwm)

To:   Ackanomians
From: mr cwm

I accept appointment as Judge of CFJ 247, and will deliver a decision in a
timely manner.

On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> mr cwm, our recent Bronze Torch recipient, has been chosen for the
> following, and has 3 days to respond.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> 
> Call For Judgement 247
> Subject: Is This a Public Message by Me?
> Initiator: Malenkai
>     Judge: mr cwm (selected Jul 31, 1996, 21:04h New York Time)
> 
> Statement:
> 
> The witchhunt called on July 30, 1996, against /dev/joe was illegal.
> 
> Malenkai's reasoning:
> 
> At least one of the conditions required to call a witchhunt were met:
> 
> From R 729:
> 
> > If, in a public message, a player refers to the Earth being round, or
> > implies that this may be the case, any other player may call for a
> > Witchhunt, by publically posting that they are doing so. 
> 
> The witchhunt was called in response to the following post by the
> Promoter to the public forum:
> 
> >Proposal 1056 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:51 EDT 1996
> >I Should Be Allowed to Think
> >/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)
> 
> >Repeal rule 729, "Ackanomic Middle Ages".
> 
> "If, in a public message, a player refers..."
> 
> The obvious rendering of this is that the player must have made the post
> themselves, and it must be their own words and expression.  Under this
> common sense rendering, this post applies not as a public message by
> /dev/joe or by Wayne.  I would like the Judge to clarify, once and for
> all, this public message business, preferably along my obvious
> translation :)
> 
> I personally have no opinion as to whether or not /dev/joe is a heretic,
> but I insist that the rules be followed.
> 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:45:06 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: no contract! 

Ackazens,

I have submitted a series of CFJs about contracts in general and /dev/joe's
and tinan's in particular.  Please peruse these before you decide whether
to submit your own.

ThinMan

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 18:23:38 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: no contract!

John Bollinger wrote:
> 
> Ackazens,
> 
> I have submitted a series of CFJs about contracts in general and /dev/joe's
> and tinan's in particular.  Please peruse these before you decide whether
> to submit your own.

The CotC has received some CFJs.  The CotC is in a sort of a quandry due
to the state of P 1043.  I do *not* want to do multi-threaded Judge
selection.

Wayne, could you please release P 1043's results as soon as humanly
possible.  Thanks.

Another plug for my "Publically Knowable" RFC floating around :)
 
Clerk of the Courts

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 18:32:47 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 244 Verdict

mr cwm wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Malenkai wrote:
> 
> [big snip]
> 
> > If I do not return a definitive verdict, it simply
> > becomes someone else's, or the Supreme Court's whim.
> 
> [and more snipping]
> 
> I object to the Supreme Court being singled out for the use of whim. 

Once again where it is shown that Malenkai cannot read or write.  The gist
of the verdict was that rules, facts, and game custom could not be used,
or were indetermine.  Thus "spirit of the game", or "whim" to quote the
infamous CFJ 228, was required unless facts to the contrary came to light.

All I was saying was that if I declined or made a bad verdict, it would be
someone else's problem, so that was a poor option.  I mentioned the 
supreme court as an entity whose problem it was more likely to become 
than any others.

Please reread the entire reasoning.  I thought what was intended was clear,
but I suppose it was not.

I apologise to the Supreme Court or anyone else who was offended by my
reasoning, it was unintended.

Malenkai
needs to go to third grade :)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 18:40:39 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official

The Assistant Tabulator and Clerk of the Courts has received some
material (votes, CFJ, etc) that may have been delivered illegally,
if P 1043 passed.

Please note that you may have to manually take yourself off vacation,
even if you do not believe you are on vacation, if you are on vacation.
The web page has a list of who is on vacation.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, I have
a night of non-Acka plans anyway, so I cannot get to the stuff for awhile.

Hopefully we'll know about P 1043 (is that the right number?) soon.

Malenkai
Frazzled. Should not stay up 'till 2:30 playing Acka again

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:58:02 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Jason Reed)
Subject: Newspapers? 

Are there any still up and running that wouldn't mind a newsfeed from
another Nomic, seeing as MicroNomic doesn't yet have a free press?

- ---Pascal

Jason Reed

*******************************************************************************
* Nomic: Player: Fascists 14 & 15, AckaNomic, MicroNomic * Founder: Fascists
12-14, MicroNomic * Ambassador & Liason: Fascist 14 * Speaker: MicroNomic *
AckaNomian Heretic * Ex- : Fascist 14 TIE & THS, Agora Player, Thring
Player, pNomic Player. * Stuff: game programming, MOO-coding, Richard's PBeM
Server, Emulation, Civ II *
*******************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:02:45 +0000
From: The Supreme Court <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 107 Verdict

CFCJ 107 - The Court overturns the decision to FALSE.

The players who cast the votes were aware, or certainly should have been
aware, that their votes would be reported in a public forum.  Furthermore,
the wording of R729 is very broad - only an implication of a possibility
that the Earth is not flat is required. The Court finds that this minimal
standard has been met in the present case, thus no violation of R101 has
occurred. 

Penalty for the original judge: 1 point

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:33:09 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Appeal For Pardon 

In light of the recent Supreme Court verdict overturning the original
judges decision on CFCJ 107 I am asking the president of Ackanomic for an
Appeal forPpardon.

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:33:16 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 107 Verdict

At 1:02 AM 8/2/96, The Supreme Court wrote:
>CFCJ 107 - The Court overturns the decision to FALSE.
>
>The players who cast the votes were aware, or certainly should have been
>aware, that their votes would be reported in a public forum.  Furthermore,
>the wording of R729 is very broad - only an implication of a possibility
>that the Earth is not flat is required. The Court finds that this minimal
>standard has been met in the present case, thus no violation of R101 has
>occurred.
>
>Penalty for the original judge: 1 point

I respectfully ask that the Witchfinder General issue the Witchhunt results
for the players I originally called a witchhunt against (re: cjcj 107).

snowgod

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Stuck in the Gaol for a Week
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 20:45:06 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Gaoler

As Acting Gaoler, I 'ave just 'ad the privilege and delight of putting 
Malenkai where 'e belongs: be'ind bars, where all miscreants should go.

And where snowgod should stay. It'll teach 'im a lesson about Heresy.

Malenkai is in the East wing, in cell number 3,492,391.

snowgod is in the West wing, in cell number 8.

(The Gaol, like the Earth, is Flat. Don't try rolling wadded-up messages 
to each other, guys.)

It will be with great reluctance that I release snowgod at 14:04 tomorrow.

:)

tinan
Acting Gaoler

- --      Mike Epstein            "Asking an incumbent member of Congress
      [email-masked]           to vote for term limits is a bit like
  *                      *       asking a chicken to vote for
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/    Colonel Sanders."   --Bob Inglis, 1995

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 20:53:24 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 107 Verdict

Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> I respectfully ask that the Witchfinder General issue the Witchhunt results
> for the players I originally called a witchhunt against (re: cjcj 107).

The following paragraph was released with the last batch of witchhunt
results.  If this is not sufficient, please drop me a private note. It
was counted at the time, just not collated into one file for delivery.
I am overworked right now, so it will be several days before I can get
to the detail, if you insist on having it.

BTW, either snowgod or Supreme Court has the time on their mailer 
misconfigured, as I got snowgod's reply an hour before the verdict.

Witchfinder General

>Note that the legality of the witchhunts discussed in CFCJ 107 and 108
>is indeterminate, given the appeals.  I point out, however, that the
>voting period is over for those as well,  and no heretics were found in
>any threads which would grant the legality of those witchhunts (which
>in my opinion, is 0 threads).

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 20:58:05 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Gaoler

this is not a name wrote:
> 
> As Acting Gaoler, I 'ave just 'ad the privilege and delight of putting
> Malenkai where 'e belongs: be'ind bars, where all miscreants should go.

An acting officer has no priviledges.  Also, the real Gaoler may be
back from vacation by tomorrow.

Also, I did not see the AOJ overturning the president's pardon.  Could you
please forward a copy to me?
 
> It will be with great reluctance that I release snowgod at 14:04 tomorrow.

snowgod's sentence was for seven days, starting two days
ago.  I did not see the president's pardon on that one either.  Am I 
having e-mail problems?

Malenkai

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 21:04:28 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Gaoler

this is not a name wrote:
> 
> As Acting Gaoler,

I also note that if P 1043 passed, you are not the acting Gaoler.

Malenkai

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 23:06:59 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1063

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Proposal 1063 - Wed Jul 31 11:41:33 EDT 1996
> No Weekend Passes
> snowgod  (Phil Ackley)
> 
> Amend R709 by adding the following paragraph to the end of the rule.
> 
> This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow a player to
> preform any game actions.

I recommend a vote of NO on this proposal.  First of all, it claims
precedence over R 111, which contradicts other language in the rule.

Secondly, it claims precedence over itself, which may not be a wonderful
thing.

Thirdly, my Locations idea is going to improve the security of the Gaol,
if I ever have the time to get back to it.

Malenkai
Remove potential eggs from the potential rules

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 23:18:01 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Gaoler

Malenkai wrote:
>Also, I did not see the AOJ overturning the president's pardon.  Could you
>please forward a copy to me?

There was an AOJ? I didn't get the pardon either, for that matter.

Is something wrong with the mailing list?

(cc to /dev/joe in case he's not getting list mail either)

>> It will be with great reluctance that I release snowgod at 14:04 tomorrow.
>
>snowgod's sentence was for seven days, starting two days
>ago.  I did not see the president's pardon on that one either.  Am I 
>having e-mail problems?

Whoops, that one's my mistake. I thought it was 3 days.

- --      Mike Epstein            "You live and learn.
      [email-masked]          	At any rate, you live."
  *                      *             --Douglas Adams
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/

------------------------------

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #149
*******************************